From: Clkaynor@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 1:28 PM
To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov
Subject: Docket 00N-1396 & Docket 00D-1598
I understand that the FDA is proposing rules that:
* Do not require mandatory pre-market safety testing
* Do not require pre-market environmental review
* Do not require mandatory labeling of GE foods
* Restrict voluntary labeling of non-GE foods
* Require a mere letter of notification prior to the
marketing of a GE food
* Fail to ensure public access to adequate information
for independent review
* Are supported by industry and opposed by consumer groups
I oppose the production and marketing of genetically engineered food.
However, if I can't control the product of the food, I at least want to know
which food on the market has ANY genetically engineered ingredients. I'm
appalled to think your organization would even CONSIDER denying that right.
Whichever individuals in the FDA are supporting the "rules," above, I'm
mystified that you can feel safe feeding your children food that isn't
explicitly labeled. If your own child has allergic reactions to any of the
foods, wouldn't you want to know the ingredients, so you could investigate?
For example, if your child turned out to be allergic to genetically-modified
corn ingredients that are prevalent in so many processed foods, how would you
be able to identify the food products safe or unsafe for your child? I simply
don't understand your reasoning for supporting the nonlabeling of these
foods.
I support technological growth. I think there are many resources on this
planet that might provide the population with better health, disease control,
etc. But, SO FAR, when scientists have meddled with genetic structure the
results have had some devastating consequences--killer bees as one example.
And when the agriculture industry tries to turn herbivores into carnivores
(putting animal products in food for cattle, sheep, goats, etc.), the results
have been deadly and costly--Mad Cow Disease, Hoof and Mouth disease, etc.
I don't think scientists are supposed to alter the basic genetic structures
of resources on this planet, but can learn how to utilize them optimally. How
arrogant to believe that we can keep meddling, little-by-little, with the
precious planetary eco-system supporting our lives.
Whether or not you agree with this point of view--there are hundreds of
thousands of people that share this same point of view, and we deserve a
voice, and our rights to choose the foods we eat should be preserved.
Not only that, but if the ecosystem on this planet is altered so much that it
can't be "changed back" to its original state, how are we going to cope with
the consequences?
Please do not pass this bill.
Sincerely,
Cynthia Ballou
Fairfield, Iowa